Posted on 06/13/2023 7:53:46 AM PDT by SunkenCiv
“If correlative state changes are detectable and repeatable, then its simply a matter of which one is 0 and which one is 1. Plus a clock on each end. Same as measuring voltage on a gate.”
Not quite, since state changes also happen at random when a person is not interacting with the entangled particles on the other end. So the only possible way to determine if actual data is being sent is to have a classical communication channel that accompanies the entangled particles, which means the entire system is slowed down to light speed or below.
If they detected a change A in cloud 1 correlative to a change B in cloud 2, then information is being transmitted instantaneously. The question then is whether it must be simply random, or whether a change/measurement in cloud One can be induced that is consistent with another change/measurement in cloud 2. Plus a clock and filters for noise, etc.
“then information is being transmitted instantaneously”
Yes, but not useable information. Until you can distinguish whether it is purposefully transmitted information or random noise, it is unusable. And to distinguish that requires classical (sublight) communication of information.
Believe me, you’re far from the first person to think it can be used like this, and far from the first to be disappointed that it cannot. This has been well established for decades.
I have to go let a cat out of a box. I think.
As gravity is a function of curved space, it doesn’t have to ‘travel’ and doesn’t have a speed. In the same way, entanglement is a property of space itself. ‘What’ property is to be considered. Imho at least.
The problem with that is there is no way to know what state the particle would be in when you observe it. Then there’s the whole problem of which tangled quanta is observed first. If the receiver is already looking at it, then the sender has nothing to change by his observation...
I will have it all figured out soon. I just need a few billion more tax dollars to fund it. And of course it will lead to a revolution in “green” energy so if you happen to know any democrats tell them I am in immediate need of some pork....
The article is poorly written then, because it suggests that through some statistical analysis they were able to detect a pattern. Although it may just be that the "pattern" is that a change in A was accompanied by a statistically significant and related change in B that showed the two were entangled.
Well, you can tell if there is a change in the entangled particle on the other end, but you have to pick up your telephone and call the other lab and say “I just did something to particle A”. Then they’ll know the change in particle B is due to your manipulation and not some other cause.
Being able to manipulate entangled particles like that is nothing new; it seems the new thing this article is excited about is using an Einstein-Bose condensate, where all the particles are harmonized and acting in unison, like the photons in a laser, so that you can entangle larger and larger groups of particles. But it is standard fare for pop-sci writers to imply that entanglement can be used for instantaneous communication or “teleportation”, etc, because that will interest the general public and get them clicks. In reality, science has a whole theorem developed about why that can’t work:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-communication_theorem
Re-read the article, which I misunderstood. They were just reading different property changes, and when they occurred, they occurred in both Bose-Einstein condensates in such a way that it showed entanglement in the two clouds. So it’s just that the entanglement phenomenon is found at a larger scale than individual particles.
“...distinguish whether it is purposefully transmitted information or random noise...” - that was solved for noisy analog commo last century; every character has a prefix, no prefix, then it’s not a character, it’s just noise. Very slow, but it worked.
Well, you also have an additional problem with quantum states, in that you have to measure them to receive the message, and measuring them changes the state of the entangled system. So you can’t just be a passive receiver like if you leave a radio turned on waiting for the message. Has the state changed because someone on the other side is sending a message? Or has it just changed because of the last time you took a measurement?
And you can’t just measure once to check for a “prefix”, since you are limited to a very few manipulations of quantum systems, so you can only send bits (or qbits) of information. A prefix can’t just be a “zero” or a “one” but would have to be a unique string of such data, and that means you would have to take multiple measurements (each changing the system) to check for a prefix. I don’t think that’s workable.
Thanks.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.